Summary of responses to European Commission green paper "Towards a new culture for urban mobility"

1.  Should a “labelling scheme be envisaged to recognise the efforts of pioneering cities to combat congestion and improve living conditions
Of the 36 responders, 13 had general or no comments at all to this question. Of the 23 that responded 'Yes', most said there was merit in highlighting best practice and that any proposed labelling scheme should have a simple mechanism to facilitate and share information regarding successful measures or innovative ideas.

2.  What measures could be taken to promote walking and cycling as real alternatives to the car?
Of the 24 respondents that answered this question the general consensus was that effective measures to promote walking and cycling should be focused on behavioural change and creating infrastructure that supports walking and cycling

3.  What could be done to promote a modal shift towards sustainable transport modes in cities?
26 consultees responded to this question most agreed that raising public awareness of the alternatives was key, as well as creating accessible and convenient collective transport interchanges.    

4.  How could the use of clean and energy efficient technologies in urban transport be further increased?
Respondents commented that this could be best achieved though national and EU level policies which nurture the development of clean technology and support its promulgation into urban environments.

5.  How could joint green procurement be promoted?
Consultees commented that this could be promoted through best practice guides and it should be left to individual local areas to decide if they wish to adopt green procurement practices.

6.  Should criteria or guidance be set out for the definition of Green Zones and their restriction measures? What is the best way to ensure their compatibility with free circulation? Is there an issue of cross border enforcement of local rules governing Green Zones?
Of the 24 responses there was no indication of a 'Yes' or ‘No’ response. However, respondents commented that local authorities should be left to decide the criteria of any Green Zone, but that the Commission could provide guidance for the establishment of such zones.

7.  How could eco-driving be further promoted?
Respondents' commented that eco-driving should be further promoted though awareness campaigns.

8.  Should better information services for travellers be developed and promoted?
26 responded 'Yes' with 7 not indicating 'Yes' or 'No'. Respondents commented that EU action to provide guidance and best practice dissemination would be of most value.

9.  Are further actions needed to ensure standardisation of interfaces and interoperability of ITS applications in towns and cities? Which applications should take priority when action is taken?
22 responded Yes 1 No. Of the 22 that answered yes promoting best practice was suggested as the best way to ensure standardisation and those local authorities should have flexibility to implement local solutions.

10.  Regarding ITS, how could the exchange of information and best practices between all involved parties be improved?
27 consultees responded. Most agreed that the exchange of information and best practice should be supported through local, regional, national and European working groups.

11.  How can the quality of collective transport in European towns and cities be increased?
33 responses were received. The majority agreed that the best way to improve quality was though local, regional and national authorities, who understand local priorities.

12.  Should the development of dedicated lanes for collective transport be encouraged?
25 responses were received. The majority supported the use of dedicated bus lanes.

13.  Is there a need to introduce a European Charter on rights and obligations for passengers using collective transport?
Of 22 responses received 7 said ‘Yes’ and 12 said ‘No’. Of those that said 'No,' most felt, that a European Charter would be too inflexible to cover all modes of transport.

14.  What measures could be undertaken to better integrate passenger and freight transport in research and in urban mobility planning?
19 responded to this question. Most thought that there were many measures that could be taken forward, but none which required a role for the EU.

15.  How can better coordination between urban and interurban transport and land use planning be achieved? What type of organisational structure could be appropriate?
21 responded to this question. The majority of respondents felt that land use and urban/interurban transport planning is best achieved though local, regional and national structures.

16.  What further actions should be undertaken to help cities and towns meet their road safety and personal security challenges in urban transport?
23 responded to this question. The majority of respondents commented that EU action could include better education and awareness campaigns.

17.  How can operators and citizens be better informed on the potential of advanced infrastructure management and vehicle technologies for safety?
16 responded to this question. Respondents commented that European sponsored events and marketing campaigns and online information systems would be most useful.

18.  Should automatic radar devices adapted to the urban environment be developed and should their use be promoted?
17 responded 'Yes'
17 did not answer 'Yes' or 'No'.
Respondents commented that more clarification was needed as to the definition of automatic radar device.

19.  Is video surveillance a good tool for safety and security in urban transport?
22 responded 'Yes' 1 responded 'No'. Those that responded 'Yes ' commented that the use of video surveillance in their locality had reduced crime and created a safer environment for the public.

20.  Should all stakeholders work together in developing a new mobility culture in Europe? Based on the model of the European Road Safety Observatory, could a European Observatory on Urban Mobility be a useful initiative to support this cooperation?
22 responded 'Yes' 3 'No'.  The respondents who answered this question commented that an observatory would be useful, but would need to be clearly defined.

21.  How could existing financial instruments such as structural and cohesion funds be better used in a coherent way to support integrated and sustainable urban transport?
16 Responded to this question. The majority commented that the funds needed to be simplified to make them more accessible and support a broader range of objectives.

22.  How could economic instruments, in particular market-based instruments, support clean and energy efficient urban transport?
17 responded to this question. Respondents commented that market-based instruments needed to be linked into the promotion green technology and alternative forms of transport.

23.  How could targeted research activities help more in integrating urban constraints and urban traffic development?
14 responded to this question. Respondents commented that there existing programmes which could be used e.g. CIVITAS and these programmes should continue to be supported.

24.  Should towns and cities be encouraged to use urban charging? Is there a need for a general framework and/or guidance for urban charging? Should the revenues be earmarked to improve collective urban transport? Should external costs be internalised?
9 answered 'Yes'
15 neither 'Yes' or 'No'
1 answered 'No'

The majority commented that the EU can promote guidance and examples of best practice on urban charging. But, an EU framework for urban charging would be inappropriate. Most felt that external costs should only be internalised if these included congestion costs, pollution costs and accident costs.

25.  What added value could, in the longer term, targeted European support for financing clean and energy efficient urban transport bring? What could be the potential role of the EU?
20 responded to this question. The majority believed that targeted European support would spread knowledge and best practice across Europe and help shape future EU policies.